D&D 5E House rule for Victorian era aesthetic - no armor

[Vaslov]

The rule tweaks could be ok. For some reason what came to mind when reading the title was some of Kazimierz Żegleń work around silk body armor from the early 1900's. Plenty of lore around silk stopping blades as well in earlier dates. A simple 1:1 change between medium and heavy armors with some variation of silk armor could be a rules light way to address it. If you have magic or alchemical processes in the setting that could be used to explain away the nature of the materials. For some reason after seeing this the image caught in my mind is a silk parasol being used as a shield. Practical and stylish!

 

[Quartz]

KISS: say that all combat classes get some variant of the Barbarian's Unarmoured Defence

Fighters may use their Proficiency Bonus instead of their Dex modifier when calculating AC and Initiative. So they get a UD AC of 10+ Prof Bonus + Con Bonus.

Similarly, Paladins can use their Cha modifier instead of their Dex modifier when calculating AC and Initiative. So they get a UD AC of 10 + Cha Bonus + Con Bonus.

And so on.

 

[Morrus]

I have to agree that the action cost to adopt a style which you are able to maintain permanently seems an uneccessary added detail.

I like the magical armour subsitutions - long coats, and the like.

 

[Ratskinner]

Honestly, I really don't like the "spend an action" rule. IMHO it is just annoying, and then in most cases you won't even use it because characters will choose to be in a "stance" all the time, so why having this rule in the first place? I don't see the point of an extra cost to pay once in a while. I would just replace armor proficiency with a base AC that is valid all the time. Much simpler and already balanced.

Perhaps it should be a movement action? Like, if you're bolting across the field, you don't have time to parry, etc.

 

[Ratskinner]

KISS: say that all combat classes get some variant of the Barbarian's Unarmoured Defence

Fighters may use their Proficiency Bonus instead of their Dex modifier when calculating AC and Initiative. So they get a UD AC of 10+ Prof Bonus + Con Bonus.

Similarly, Paladins can use their Cha modifier instead of their Dex modifier when calculating AC and Initiative. So they get a UD AC of 10 + Cha Bonus + Con Bonus.

And so on.

hmm....why Con Bonus? With guns in the mix, I think Dex is where I would stay (unrealistic, but fantastic). I would see the Con bonus already baked into the HP total.

 

[Ratskinner]

No, melee and ranged.

And yes, there will be guns.

How will you handle gun damage? HP always seems rather odd with the way guns work, IMO.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I would use a simple Defense bonus adjustment based on class and level, similar to SWSE.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

hmm....why Con Bonus? With guns in the mix, I think Dex is where I would stay (unrealistic, but fantastic). I would see the Con bonus already baked into the HP total.

Strength + Dex for fighters, Cha + Dex for paladins, Con + Dex for Barbarians, Wis + Dex for monks. Everyone else can make do with breastplates, leather and studded leather.

 

[Quartz]

hmm....why Con Bonus?

Because that's what the Barbarian's UD uses.

With guns in the mix, I think Dex is where I would stay (unrealistic, but fantastic). I would see the Con bonus already baked into the HP total.

Dex is already the uber-stat. Do you want every PC maximising Dex? And you're already using it, you're just providing an alternative. Just because you can substitute the other bonus for your Dex bonus doesn't mean that you have to. Your Dex 18 Fighter with a Proficiency Bonus of 3 gets Unarmoured Defence of 14 + Con Bonus, not 13 + Con bonus.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

In a gun setting it makes sense for dex to be far more important than strength.

Although you might want to push up fisticuffs as a common form of combat, and make strength key to that.